Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
S v Sani (R67/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 417 (12 December 2024)
The High Court set aside a conviction and sentence on special review because the charge sheet was materially defective and service of the protection order was not properly established.
S v Nchabeleng (Rev 47/2024) [2024] ZALMPPHC 54 (28 May 2024)
The High Court set aside a maintenance conviction and sentence after finding unfair plea, sentencing, and review irregularities in the magistrate’s court.
S v Qina (B488/2023) [2024] ZAECMKHC 29; 2024 (2) SACR 310 (ECMk); 2024 (2) SACR 580 (ECMk) (15 March 2024)
The High Court confirmed Zolani Qina’s conviction for housebreaking with intent to steal and sent the matter back for sentencing, despite concerns about delay and procedure.
S v Matsemela [2023] ZAGPPHC 554; A158/2022 (13 July 2023)
The High Court upheld the appeal against an attempted murder conviction, finding material credibility problems, a defective charge sheet, and unsafe evaluation of the evidence.
S v Koeries (146/2023) [2023] ZAWCHC 128; [2023] 4 All SA 629 (SCA); 86 SATC 441 (24 May 2023)
The High Court confirmed a culpable homicide conviction despite a defective charge sheet, finding the accused understood the case and suffered no prejudice.
Nkosi v S (A65/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 863 (11 November 2022)
The High Court upheld a criminal appeal because the charge sheet failed to specify the sexual offence allegedly attempted, rendering the conviction and sentence unsustainable.
S v Chirihoru and Others (35/2022;36/2022;37;2022;38;2022;39/2022;40/2022;41/2022;42/2022;43;2022;44/2022;45/2022;46/2022;47/2022;48/2022) [2022] ZALMPPHC 40 (19 July 2022)
The court found that the accused were convicted of offences under the incorrect statute without proper amendment of the charge sheets, violating their right to a fair trial. The magistrate failed to follow the procedures set out in section 86 of the Criminal Procedure Act, resulting in convictions for non-existent offences. The striking off of certain matters from the roll was motivated by personal disagreement rather than legal grounds and constituted gross irregularity. The proceedings were not in accordance with justice and must be set aside.
Source excerpt
Majikijela v S (AR199/2015) [2020] ZAKZPHC 64 (6 November 2020)
The court found that the conviction for rape was correct, as the complainant's evidence was credible, corroborated by medical findings, and supported by other witnesses. The charge sheet, although defective in referencing s 51(2) instead of s 51(1), did not prejudice the appellant, who was aware of the potential for a life sentence. The appellant's fair trial rights were not infringed, as there was no indication that he would have conducted his defence differently had the charge sheet been correct. The magistrate had jurisdiction to impose life imprisonment, as the facts placed the offence wi…
Source excerpt
T M and Another v S (A109/2019) [2019] ZAFSHC 195 (24 October 2019)
The High Court dismissed a rape conviction appeal but reduced each appellant’s sentence from 15 years to 10 years after correcting the applicable statutory provision.
Botha v S (A54/2016) [2019] ZAGPPHC 244 (11 June 2019)
The appeal succeeded in respect of the sentences of life imprisonment imposed for rape (counts 1 and 8) because the charge sheet referenced section 51(2) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and did not specify the aggravating circumstances required for life imprisonment under section 51(1). The trial court was therefore not competent to impose life imprisonment. The evidence established that the complainant was under 16 and repeatedly raped, but this was not reflected in the charges. The conviction and sentence on count 9 were set aside as the charge was not put to the appellant. The conviction…
Source excerpt
Explore more
